Skip to main content

tv   [untitled]    May 14, 2011 9:30pm-10:00pm PDT

9:30 pm
i have a scum of slides on the landscaping, lighting, and then finish up with the schedule. >> we have completed the concept design and moved into -- as well as schematic design, and move in through design development. so as part of that, we've completed the underground surveys. we have analyzed excavation requirements. we need to excavate about 2/3 of the site in order to provide adequate head room for the buses to stage and store, and weave also completed the -- and we've also completed the layout of the facility. we continue our coordination with caltrans. we have been working on a seismic analysis for the west approach. as you know, caltrans put a lot of effort into upgrading the west approach over the last couple of years, and so we're
9:31 pm
going through a fairly lengthy effort to demonstrate our excavation in that area will not inhibit their structure that they recently upgraded. as part of that project effort, we have also submitted a p.s.r., project study report at the end of december, and now we're continuing to work with caltrans to supplement that with foundation reports, turnover analysis, and other supporting documents that will then allow caltrans to ultimately approve this project study report. slide here is a schematic layout showing what was shown in the original feir. the key things i want to point out is the project was shown to be bounded by sound walls. in blue, you see there were
9:32 pm
noise walls called for 10 to 12 feet high. there were also calls for a ramp particularly called for over second street. we made a fairly large effort to stay true to those requirements. we're working with the community on that, too. the layout you have before you now is the layout as it stands now. the site, as i noted, is bounded by the sound walls, 10 to 12 foot high. we're working with caltrans on these, and we're basically adhering to a standard caltrans wall, but then trying to make these morass net i canly appealing to the neighbors by providing some landscaping on the outside. i've got some slides of those. the other things i'd like to point out that have changed since my last presentation, if you look at the entrance on
9:33 pm
third street, one of the items that came up as part of our value analysis is that was identified as kind of a problem area as far as circulation for buses coming in, as well as the private vehicles that you still -- that use perry street. so we're redesigned that so segregate the bus traffic from the private vehicle traffic, and we've kept perry street as a two-way street. so we think that's a much better configuration and a lot safer. the other item that we have changed since our last presentation is we've moved the caltrans -- the a.c. transit administration offices over one bay, so they're one bay closer to second street. what that has allowed us is to provide tandem parking for the buses in the previous spot, so that increases our bus counts a little more, and we're currently at 50 buses.
9:34 pm
this is an image of some of the items that we're thinking about in terms of the sound walls. like i mentioned, we're looking at standard caltrans walls, but then we want to put a living wall in front of it, so this would be a metal grid structure or wood structure, and have planted vines on it. it softens it up for the neighbors and also helps with maintenance. makes it more graffiti- resistant. this is a slide on landscaping. we have begun to start thinking about a landscaping, different types of bonds. we have different conditions on the site. the site facing stillman is a lot sunnier, which differs from the side facing second and third, on the west approach, which tends to be more shaded. the other item on landscaping is
9:35 pm
we hired an arborist to look at the trees. there are trees along stillman street. our concern was when we did the excavation, it could inhibit the rootballs of existing trees. so the arborist report showed that excavation will impact the rootballs of existing trees. they have also said that most of the trees were in very poor condition. they recommended that we replace these. we have met with the community, last month, and went through theis with them, explain that it was recommended that they be removed. they asked us to come in with some new street trees, so we will be working with dpw on that. this is an image from the
9:36 pm
arborist report. you can see in yellow, those are the trees on stillman street. the various conditions of those trees. lighting, we have done a lighting analysis. we are proposing to supplement some of the high pressure sodium lights that caltrans has under the west approach with led lights in key areas. this is the entrance from third straight -- third street. that is a critical location because buses will be coming and going, during the tiger terminal, so we need to have that well lit. on the left is the existing conditions. on the right is the proposed. the next slide is another key area which is also on stillman street, near second.
9:37 pm
this is a secondary exit. we want to provide adequate lighting. it is also where the ac transit administration offices are. skindell. -- schedule. caltrans will continue to lease the error out for private vehicle parking. we will continue to negotiate least negotiations with caltrans and then we will complete the seismic analysis and obtained approval on the psr and complete construction documents. my last slide is a schedule showing the nativity. we start the west seismic analysis last fall. we continue to work through that. this august, we will complete the advanced planning studies in support of that. then we hope to have the psr
9:38 pm
approved by this december. in parallel, jacob is working on the other documents. so we will have 65% cd's in october, 95% in april. procurement will happen from may 2012 through august 2012. we are targeting construction to start in august 2012, and should be completed in october 2013. >> any questions? >> i have a question. who is responsible for the maintenance of those walls? >> we will probably have a maintenance contractor. we have not finalized the lease negotiations but caltrans or ac transit, so that is something that we would have to finalize as part of our discussions. >> maybe i should have asked
9:39 pm
that yesterday, but is there a bathroom in the administration building? >> yes. one of the things that we were looking at 0 1/5 wheat are proposing to go to a modular buildings. we have demonstrated these can be portable enough to remove, but the benefit is, it allows us to consolidate these office spaces and we would have an area for restaurants in there. it provides ac transit a better facility, rather than a series of trailers where you have to go in and out two different buildings. >> i was just wondering, drivers coming back needing access. >> yes, we have restrooms there. >> that concludes my report, directors. >> the next item on your agenda
9:40 pm
is item six. public comment period and opportunity for the members of the public to address directors on item not on today's calendar. >> good morning, director. james brooks. the summary of my comments are before you in a letter. i would like to read through it and make some general comments regarding it. at our cac meeting on april 12, a presentation was made by staff regarding public artwork for the new transit center. as you know, there are five works of art for the transit center. four of the artists -- that artwork had been presented to our cac. we had met with staff regarding it over the last 16 months.
9:41 pm
we feel those four works of art sit well and fit within the goals that the directors have said already, of artwork on a both small and large scale, that will focus on particular areas of the center, and will enhance the experience of everyone passing through its doors. however, the work of the fifth artist, timothy hawkinson, who was selected to design a landmark entry sculpture at the northeast corner of the center had not been before our cac until april 12 of this year. during staff presentation, we were told the board of directors had already commissioned this work with the advice and consent of the severed his go arts commission. we take issue with the vetting process that was used in selecting this artist and more importantly, the choice of the sculpture itself. as a cac, we were created by you to provide community-wide input,
9:42 pm
review and support the various parts and processes that make up the transit center. in this case, the director's desire to create a one-of-a- kind landmark entry sculpture, and this cac was excluded from the process and only after the award had been made where we briefed. that is of concern to us and we will certainly work through that with staff. in addition, putting aside our concerns regarding the process, the cac has several issues with the commission's design concept, which is on the overhead, at this time. this landmark sculpture is to be a sculpture that is new, out of the old friends a terminal. the incorporation or recycling of the elements from the old was presented to us as a unique time-and with respect to the
9:43 pm
sculpture. it was reported that the artist had already picked of different pieces for the sculpture and was working with contractors. we would like to take particular issue with several of those concepts. i believe you have all seen the mockup of the art work. we feel the use of a lamppost that can be found on any freeway or street in california to be of no significance or relation to the transit center we are currently talking about. the use of demolished krail, the concrete barrier, to be of no significant relation to the transit center. the use of reinforced concrete pillars produced in the 1960's to be of no significance or relation to the transit center. in addition, we feel this sculpture presents significant liability and copyright infringement issues. the sculpture, as visually
9:44 pm
presented, looks like one of the multimedia transformers, that is the creative property of the hasbro toy company. we encourage you to go home, talk to your nieces and nephews and kids, and you will see that the proposed design is not unique, and in fact, may be construed to be promoting the hasbro toy company movie, a game, and franchise. issues of copyright and trademark infringement should be addressed by legal counsel, sooner than later, if you are to continue with this sculpture. you may also want to hear from your legal counsel regarding what options and financial penalties would be involved, if the board changes course of the sculpture and returned to the drawing board. it is our advice to the tjpa border of directors that you do just that. the cac would like to see this item put on calendar for a more thorough discussion.
9:45 pm
the cac continues to work with staff and we would like to call to your attention the wonderful work that has been done by our staff liaison and harassed secretary, who worked well with us. thank you very much. >> thank you. >> [inaudible] >> okay, moving into the consent calendar. >> [inaudible] 7.1, approving the minutes of april 14 meeting. 7.2,authorizing the executive director to establish a five- firm bench of real estate economics consultants to provide services to tjpa over a five-
9:46 pm
year period on an as-needed basis, extend current real estate economics bench consultants' contracts until each contract budget is fully utilized, and execute new professional services agreements with any or all firms on the real estate economics bench as long as the additional total compensation under all bench agreements does not exceed $500,000. 7.3 authorizing the executive director to execute license agreements with comcast, level 3, and abovenet to allow each of these telecommunications companies to temporarily relocate their facilities overhead on utility poles owned and installed by the tjpa through tjpa-owned parcels n and n' at no cost to the tjpa, to allow for construction of the transit center. >> is there a motion to approve the consent calendar? >> second. >> all those in favor? suppose? passes unanimously. let us move now to the regular calendar. >> moving into the regular calendar.
9:47 pm
item eight. presentation of and public hearing for draft fiscal year 2011-12 capital budget in an amount not to exceed $220,296,000 and draft fy 2011- 12 operating budget in an amount not to exceed $4,239,000. >> sarah will report on this item. >> good morning, directors. this is the presentation of the draft budget for next fiscal year and it is for information only. i am happy to answer any questions. next month, we will bring you the final budget for adoption. it is a proposed $220 million budget for the capital side, $4.2 million on operating side. the largest percentage of the capital budget, 94%, it is for professional and specialized services. we keep our staff size small and we use consultants and contractors to assist us in moving the program along on schedule and within budget.
9:48 pm
94%, $207 million, is for professional and specialized services. the largest bulk of that is for construction, $154 million for construction activities. that will include the completion of all the demolition work in the upcoming fiscal year and continued work on the largest package, the buttress shoring and excavation package. also within that category are $15 million for design spirit that will include completion of construction documents for the transit center. as you just saw, on schedule for bus storage, will be nearly complete for the bus storage facilities as well. moving on to the revenue side, as mentioned in the staff report, we received $850 million in allocations. because the fiscal year budget is just a slice of the overall program budget, this budget
9:49 pm
includes just the revenues that we anticipate needing for staff -- for the upcoming fiscal year. on the operating side, $4.2 million proposed in the budget. this would cover the operations, expenditures associated with the temper terminal. most of which are funded by an operating grant and also lease revenue from greyhound. if we award an advertising contract, then there would presumably be small revenue to supplement that as well. i am happy to answer any specific questions. >> i have one. are we not expected to sell any land next year? i do not see land sales included as part of revenues. >> at this time, we have not included funds for that in the upcoming fiscal year. if the schedule ships, we would amend the budget to include those funds.
9:50 pm
what you will see in the planned revenue part of this section it is a revenue category. that could include land sales. if we were to have land sales close in the upcoming fiscal year, it would move from planned to committed. >> at ac transit, we had been concerned about this land sale and what about the really is for that. >> ok. is there a motion to receive this? all those in favor? opposed? >> although this was a public hearing [inaudible] item nine. authorizing the executive director to execute a contract modification with evans brothers for additional construction services.
9:51 pm
[inaudible] >> steve will report on this item. >> good morning again. this is a change order for modification for ebi, who is doing a demolition. the majority, the two components. $238,000 for the removal of unforeseen contaminated soil that was found under what used to call the humped area on the crescent in the central terminal. that had to be hauled off for special handling. the other large component of this is the 979 dows and dollars for the demolition of the eminent domain buildings, the four buildings.
9:52 pm
we hope -- that is the portion that is adding the 60 days to the overall contract, as i said in the construction report. we are not extending the current demolition work past the current and the date of june 6. the other portions of the change order are made up of various unforeseen conditions and other minor changes, including building a ramp to access mission work and other minor hazardous material that needed removal, changes like that. if there any questions. >> any questions? >> no members of the public have indicated they want to address you. >> ok. motion to authorize this contract and vacation? second? all those in favor? opposed passes unanimously.
9:53 pm
>> item 9 is groups. that moves you to next item. item 10. approving an amendment to contract no. 08-04 authorizing webcor/obayashi joint venture to award a trade subcontract to pass electric as the responsible bidder submitting the lowest responsive bid in the amount of $650,000. [inaudible] >> good morning, directors. the item before you today is a contract that will be awarded as a subcontract to the contract with webcor/obayashi for construction of the transit center. this is to provide a temporary power connections. the transit center construction site spans four city blocks and we are going to have five points of service connection for
9:54 pm
temporary power that will be utilized during the course of construction facilities. that is the scope of services under this contract. this was bid as a one of 1% sbe participation subcontract and passed electric, the most responsive bidder is an espy, and their construction team is 100% sbe. i can take any questions you have on the scope of the contract or selection process. >> any questions? >> this is an area, as you know, that i have great concerns about, awarding contracts to s be, dbe's. i want to know the participation with tjpa with webcor/obayashi when these contracts are being selected. are they 100% making sure?
9:55 pm
i would not want to see webcor/obayashi b just a team maker. >> no, we are partisan bidding with them in the pre qualification process, the receipt of bids, review of bid documentation. all of that is done with tjpa staff and webcor/obayashi staff in conjunction. >> the second question is, is there tension that exists, when we are dealing with small business, dbe's, big sbe's vs. small sbe's, and whether, the competition between the two of them and whether we make it available to small sbe's to be able to compete for these jobs. >> we do recognize multiple listings of sbes.
9:56 pm
the first is the city of san francisco small business listing as well as the state of california mgsa small business listings. they have different thresholds, the san francisco threshold being the lowest for what constitutes a small business, but it is open to all of those three categories of small businesses. we do not have any additional preferences -- in san francisco, they have what they call small and micro businesses, but we recognize all of the small businesses equally. >> it would be nice if we could, somehow, add to the threshold to allow small businesses -- small -- to compete and have access to
9:57 pm
those jobs from webcor. >> i could ask sarah to speak to this more broadly, but i think one of the difficulties we would have been in that is, right now we are not allowed to give any geographic preferences because we are a federal project. the smaller scale businesses, san francisco hrc listings -- if we were to have a separate category for those listings, that would be a de facto geographic preference. that is why we treat the san francisco hrc listings equally with state listings. >> i do not follow that with the demographics. if you open it, you open it to everybody. >> we do have it open for
9:58 pm
everybody. we include everybody. >> i understand, but it is the threshold that excludes allow these small businesses, -- a lot of these small businesses. maybe we could lower the threshold to accommodate smaller firms that otherwise would not have access. >> it is my understanding, that since we are using san francisco and the state, it includes all threshold? >> correct. san francisco's human rights commission certification is the smallest threshold. the businesses you are talking about, lower revenues, less than 50 employees. if we were to say a particular package was set aside only for those smaller sbes, we would, by
9:59 pm
default, be setting aside work for a local business schoopool. only san francisco certification meets those smaller threshold's. >> there are always obstacles to try to get into this area of sbes, dbes. it is frustrating. not just here, but in ac transit and everywhere. >> a motion to award this contract? second? all those in favor say aye. passes unanimously. >> no members of the public have indicated they want to speak. item 11. approving a resolution authorizing the executive director to submit an director to submit an application for statewide